View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
DATE OF MEETING: Tuesday, September 5, 2017
TIME OF MEETING: 4:00 p.m.
PLACE OF MEETING: City Commission Chambers, City Hall
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Approval of Minutes of the regular meeting of August 1, 2017
III. New Business
Case 2017-16 – 189 Strong – Demolition
IV. Old Business
Case 2017-06 – 1347 Peck Street – Siding
Case 2015-10 – 316 W. Webster Avenue – Doors
V. Other Business
VI. Adjourn
“We admire that which is old not because it is old, but because it is beautiful.” Winston Churchill
AMERICAN DISABILITY ACT POLICY FOR ACCESS TO OPEN MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION AND ANY OF ITS COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES
The City of Muskegon will provide necessary reasonable auxiliary aids and services, such as signers for the hearing impaired and audio
tapes of printed materials being considered at the meeting, to individuals with disabilities who want to attend the meeting, upon twenty-
four hour notice to the City of Muskegon. Individuals with disabilities requiring auxiliary aids or services should contact the City of
Muskegon by writing or calling the following: Ann Marie Cummings, City Clerk at 933 Terrace Street, Muskegon, MI 49440 or by call-
ing (231) 724-6705 or TTY/TDD: Dial 7-1-1 and request that representative dial 231-724-6705
1
II. MINUTES
CITY OF MUSKEGON
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
August 1, 2017
Chairperson J. Hilt called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: J. Hilt, S. Kroes, S. Radtke, A. Riegler, L. Wood
MEMBERS ABSENT: D. Warren, excused; K. Panozzo, excused
STAFF PRESENT: M. Franzak, D. Renkenberger
OTHERS PRESENT: M. Geeting; K. Vanderkoede, 3402 Bradford NE, Gr Rapids MI for the
Amazon; K. George
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the regular meeting minutes of July 5, 2017 was made by J. Hilt, supported by S.
Kroes and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
Case 2017-13 – 53 Iona. Porch Foundation. Applicant: Michael Geeting. District: McLaughlin
Current Function: Residential. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant is seeking approval to
cover the open spaces between the foundation columns supporting the front porch. Staff has approved re-
placement of porch flooring.
M. Geeting stated that he would like to replace the lattice currently encircling the porch foundation with
primed and painted corrugated metal panels. He provided pictures of another house he had done with
similar work. He wanted something that would hold up better than lattice, and keep animals from getting
under the porch. He said he may also have to replace some of the damaged floor deck with treated wood,
and he had to install hand rails, per the building inspection department. J. Hilt asked if there were rails on
the porch previously. M. Geeting stated that there were two rails, which had been heavily damaged. The
new rails would be painted white with 1” x 2” spindles and a 2” x 6” top rail. He provided a picture of a
railing similar to what he proposed. A. Radtke stated that the HDC standards did not show a picture of
the types of acceptable porch skirts. S. Radtke explained the type of spindles that would be more appro-
priate. A. Riegler suggested that the board vote on the porch skirt and railing separately. S. Radtke stated
that the porch skirt would need to be vented. A. Riegler stated that lattice would be an appropriate mate-
rial, but not nailed to the face of the porch as it currently was, and steel was not an historically appropriate
material.
A motion that the HDC deny the request to cover the open spaces between the porch foundation columns
with corrugated steel panels as proposed was made by A. Riegler, supported by S. Radtke and approved,
with A. Riegler, S. Radtke, and J. Hilt voting aye, and S. Kroes and L. Wood voting nay.
2
A second motion to allow framed lattice panels to cover the open spaces between the porch foundation
columns was made by S. Radtke, supported by A. Riegler and approved, with J. Hilt, S. Kroes, S. Radtke,
A. Riegler, and L. Wood voting aye.
Board members proceeded to discuss the proposed porch railings and the type of spindles that were ap-
propriate. M. Geeting stated that whatever he used needed to be cost effective, as he was trying to fix the
house up and sell it. He provided a picture showing a rail unit with a top rail covering the tops of the
spindles, which would be painted white.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to install a porch railing with a rail covering the tops of the
spindles as proposed, with the condition that the spindles face the inside was made by S. Radtke, support-
ed by S. Kroes and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, S. Kroes, S. Radtke, A. Riegler, and L. Wood vot-
ing aye.
Case 2017-14 – 550 W. Western Ave. Replacement Windows. Applicant: Trillium Amazon. District:
Clay-Western. Current Function: Residential. J. Pesch presented the staff report. The applicant is seek-
ing approval to replace numerous casement style windows with double or single hung windows due to
weather-related damage. The windows will remain wood and maintain muntins if required. The building
already has double hung windows mixed with casement windows. Over 50 broken casement windows or
window mechanisms currently need to be replaced.
K. Vanderkoede spoke on behalf of the Amazon. He stated that all windows in the building were replaced
in 2000. They have had no issues with the double-hung windows, but the casement windows were fail-
ing. They wished to replace the damaged casement windows with double-hung. S. Radtke stated that he
didn’t see a problem with the request, as the windows were already replacement windows. A. Riegler
concurred, stating that the proposed new windows would match the current ones. K. Vanderkoede con-
firmed that the new double-hung windows would match what was there.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to replace the damaged casement windows with double-hung
windows as proposed, as long as the work meets all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are
obtained, was made by S. Radtke, supported by J. Hilt and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, S. Kroes,
S. Radtke, A. Riegler, and L. Wood voting aye.
Case 2017-15 – 464 W. Clay Ave. Handicap access ramp. Applicant: Kimi George. District: Clay-
Western. Current Function: Vacant. This case was not listed on the meeting agenda but was heard due to
the applicant being present. K. George stated that she was considering purchasing this building to open a
salon and would need to install a handicap access ramp on the east side of the house. They would need to
remove a window and replace a door to fit the ramp, which would be installed over the shared sidewalk.
A. Riegler left at 4:30 p.m.
The board reviewed renderings provided by the applicant. K. George stated that she would also be seek-
ing a zoning variance that would allow the business to be located there. It had been a bridal boutique at
one time but had been vacant for several years since.
A motion that the HDC approve the request to install a handicap ramp on the east side of the house as
proposed so that the building will meet handicap accessibility standards, and that the installation of the
ramp will require the removal of one window and replacement of a door was made by J. Hilt, supported
by L. Wood and unanimously approved, with J. Hilt, S. Kroes, S. Radtke, A. Riegler, and L. Wood voting
aye.
3
OLD BUSINESS
Case 2017-06 – 1347 Peck Street – Siding. J. Pesch provided an update on this case. Staff met with the
property owner to determine exactly what work was being done to the exterior of the house. The owner
stated that the existing wood siding was being removed from the house to either replace the rotting wood
or repair damaged pieces. She was concerned about lead paint. A staff approval form was filled out per-
mitting the repairs to the wood siding. J. Pesch stated that he would continue to monitor the project.
Case 2015-10 – 316 W. Webster Avenue – Doors. J. Pesch stated that he had been in communication
with Martha Ferriby, Director of the Hackley Public Library, regarding the status of the building’s front
doors. Ms. Ferriby stated that the doors were refurbished causing the wood to appear lighter, the original
metal trim and handles were cleaned, and the glass in the doors was original. Documentation confirming
the restoration work done to the doors was requested.
OTHER BUSINESS
None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:46 p.m.
4
III. NEW BUSINESS
Case 2017-16 – 189 Strong – Demolition
Applicant: City of Muskegon
District: Campus
Current Function: Residential
Discussion
The applicant is seeking approval to demolish the house after it was damaged in a fire on August 16,
2017. The Public Safety Director and Building Official of the City of Muskegon are requesting immediate
demolition of all structures in the interest of public safety. The State Historic Preservation Office of Mich-
igan (SHPO) has determined that the home is/is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places
(SHPO response pending). Please also see the enclosed photos.
5
Standards
Sec. 11-31. Approval of demolition or moving of structures of historic or architectural worth.
(a) The demolition or moving of structures of historic or architectural worth shall be discouraged. The
commission shall not issue a certificate of approval for demolition of such a structure, except when the
structure is deemed a hazard to public health or safety by a responsible public agency. The commission
may, at its own discretion, issue a certificate of approval for the demolition or moving of such structure,
but shall be guided by the following conditions in exercising its judgment in granting such a certificate:
(1) The director of building inspection deems such structure to be a hazard to public safety or health
and repairs are impossible.
(2) Such structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program which will be of substantial bene-
fit to the community.
(3) Retention of such structure would cause undue financial hardship to the owner, which would be
defined as a situation where more funds than is reasonable would be required to retain the structure.
(4) The retention of such structure would not be in the interest of the community as a whole.
(b) In cases where approval for demolition is granted, for reasons other than public health or safety,
such certificate shall not become effective until six (6) months after the date of such issuance, in order to
provide a period of time within which it may be possible to relieve a hardship or to cause the property to
be transferred to another owner who will retain the structure. (Ord. No. 737, § 9, 9-25-73)
Deliberation
I move that the HDC (approve/deny) the request to demolish the structure as proposed as long as it meets
all zoning requirements and the necessary permits are obtained.
6
IV. OLD BUSINESS
Case 2017-06 – 1347 Peck Street – Siding
The property owner has started installing new wood siding to replace the damaged and rotting siding on
the house.
Case 2015-10 – 316 W. Webster Avenue – Doors
Staff has been in communication with Martha Ferriby, Director of the Hackley Public Library, regarding
the status of the building’s front doors. Documentation confirming the restoration work done to the doors
has been requested but has not yet been provided.
V. OTHER BUSINESS
None
VI. ADJOURN
7